Criminal Law in the Africa of Today and Tomorrow

James S. Read

doi:10.1017/S0021855300001297

Criminal Law in the Africa of Today and Tomorrow

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009

James S. Read

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

Future developments in the criminal laws of many African countries present a number of problems. The influence of English criminal law throughout the English-speaking areas has been universal: even in southern Africa where the legal systems are founded upon Roman-Dutch law, criminal law is to a great extent English in character.2 It will be seen, however, that English principles when applied south of the Zambezi may undergo metamorphosis as a result of reinterpretation according to fundamental notions of the Roman-Dutch system.

Type: Research Article
Information: Journal of African Law , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , Spring 1963 , pp. 5 - 17

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021855300001297 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

² See Hahlo and Kahn, The Union of South Africa, 293; Gardiner, and Lansdown, , South African Criminal Law and Procedure, 5th ed., 1946, Vol. I, p. 5Google Scholar; Pittman, Criminal Law in South Africa, 2nd ed., 1945, p. 10; Morice, English and Roman-Dutch Law, 2nd ed., 1905, p. 337; de Wet and Swanepoel, Strafreg, 14–16.

³ Discussed by the present writer at [1962] I.C.L.Q. 272–9.

⁴ See (1961) 24 M.L.R. 604–625.

^{page 6 note 1} No. 23 of 1904, later No. 10 of the Laws of Northern Nigeria.

^{page 6 note 2} No. 15 of 1916.

^{page 6 note 3} Penal Code Law, 1959.

^{page 6 note 4} See Paul Gardette v. R., [1960] E.A. 728.

^{page 6 note 5} See also Hedges, Introduction to the Criminal Law of Nigeria (excluding the Northern Region), 1962.

^{page 6 note 6} Stokes, Whitley, Anglo-Indian Codes, vol. I, p. 71.Google Scholar

^{page 7 note 1} Despatch No. 380; 10th May, 1927.

^{page 7 note 2} Tanganyika Territory: Proceedings of the Legislative Council, Fourth Session, 1929–1930, p. 126.

^{page 7 note 3} See, for example, Kenya Penal Code, cap. 24, s. 40; Criminal Code of the Gambia, cap. 21, s. 35.

^{page 7 note 4} See, for example, Uganda Penal Code, cap. 22, s. 53; Northern Rhodesia Penal Code, cap. 6, s. 61; despite the assertion to the contrary by the learned author of British Colonial Law(Dr. T. O. Elias) at p. 151, this offence does occur in the codes of these territories.

^{page 7 note 5} Tanganyika Penal Code, cap. 16, s. 18; Nyasaland Penal Code, cap. 23, s. 17.

^{page 7 note 6} Sections 3, 3, 3, 4, 3 and 3 (1) respectively of the relevant Codes.

^{page 8 note 1} [1957] A.C. 126; 23 E.A.C.A. 609.

^{page 8 note 2} At pp. 134–5 and 610 of the reports cited, respectively.

^{page 8 note 3} Section 4 (b).

^{page 8 note 4} [1940] A.C. 231.

^{page 9 note 1} With this reasoning may be contrasted that of the Supreme Court of Canada in Boucher v. R., [1951] S.C.R. 265: on the same point an opposite conclusion was reached by a majority.

^{page 9 note 2} R. v. Luima and ors. (1949), 16 E.A.C.A. 128.

^{page 9 note 3} Nambale v. R., Uganda, Monthly Bulletin of High Court Decisions, Case No. 53 of 1959.

^{page 9 note 4} R. v. Zulu, 1961 R. & N. 645.

^{page 9 note 5} See, for example, the Kenya Penal Code, cap. 24, s. 295.

^{page 9 note 6} R. v. Bokosi(1932), 3 N.P.L.R. 46; R. v. Brahim (1935), 2 E.A.C.A. 81; R. v. Ntmgujiashi (1941), 8 E.A.C.A. 55.

^{page 9 note 7} R. v. Mwale (1936), 3 E.A.C.A. 102 (Nyasaland).

^{page 9 note 8} R. v. Mahomed (1942), 9 E.A.C.A. 52; R. v. Babigamba (1945), 12 E.A.C.A. 44.

^{page 9 note 9} Uganda Penal Code, cap. 22, s. 188; Kenya Penal Code, cap. 24, s. 209 (1); Tanganyika Penal Code, cap. 16, s. 202; Zanzibar Penal Decree, cap. 13, s. 185 (1): italics supplied.

^{page 10 note 1} Northern Rhodesia Penal Code, cap. 6, s. 182 (2); Nyasaland Penal Code, cap. 23, s. 213 (2).

^{page 10 note 2} R. v. McPherson (1957), 41 Cr. App. R. 213; Nyarongov. R. (1955), 22 E.A.C.A. 422; Musunguv. R. (1955), 22 E.A.C.A. 454; Mangachaya s/o William v. R. Federal Supreme Court of Rhodesia and Nyasaland Appeal No. 13 of 1958 (Nyasaland) (unreported).

^{page 10 note 3} R. v. Mundandwe(1953), 5 N.R.L.R. 236. See also R. v. Amuli(1953), 5 N.R.L.R. 243 and R. v. Chintunkwe(1954), 5 N.R.L.R. 339.

^{page 10 note 4} [1942] A.C. 1; 28 Cr. App. R. 65.

^{page 10 note 5} Federal Supreme Court Appeal No. 48 of 1959 (unreported).

^{page 10 note 6} See also Greyson v. R., 1961 R. & N. 337.

^{page 10 note 7} Section 318 in the Criminal Code of the Federation of Nigeria and Lagos, cap. 42. The Codes in the Eastern and Western Regions of Nigeria are in similar terms.

^{page 10 note 8} R. v. Nwanjoku of Umuhu (1937), 3 W.A.C.A. 208; and see the other cases cited by Hedges, Introduction to the Criminal Law of Nigeria, pp. 46–8.

^{page 11 note 1} Sections 2 (a),3 (1) 2 (1),3 (1) 2 (1) respectively of the relevant Codes.

^{page 11 note 2} The Penal Decree, cap. 13, s. 2 (a).

^{page 11 note 3} Gangji and Nasser v. R. (1949), 7 Z.L.R. 32.

^{page 11 note 4} Gangji and Nasser v. R. (supra); Juntav. R. (1934), 1 T.L.R. (R.) 195; R. v. Mwahaila (1939), 2 N.R.L.R. 50; R. v. Musonda(1948), 4 N.R.L.R. 246.

^{page 11 note 5} Magingi v. R. (1955), 22 E.A.C.A. 387 (Tanganyika).

^{page 11 note 6} Tanganyika Penal Code, cap. 16, s. 390, added by Ordinance No. 47 of 1954. The current provisions in Kenya (Penal Code, cap. 24, s. 394) and Zanzibar (Penal Decree, cap. 13, s. 353) are similar, and more detailed; a puzzling provision in the Penal Code of Northern Rhodesia, cap. 6, s. 354, added by Ordinance No. 28 of 1931, is in substantially similar terms to the Kenya and Zanzibar provision with the vital difference that it omits the words “solicits or incites” and refers only to “any person who attempts to procure another to do an act…” It might be queried whether this does in fact embrace acts generally known as incitement. In Uganda, Nyasaland and the Gambia there appears to be no express provision on the point at all.

^{page 11 note 7} Sections 20, 20, 21 of the respective Codes; and see also the proviso to the “savings clause” quoted above:

“Provided that if a person commits an offence which is punishable under this Code and is also punishable under another Ordinance or Statute of any of the kinds mentioned in this section, he shall not be punished for that offence both under that Ordinance and Statute and also under this Code.”

The proviso is oddly phrased in omitting to specify “an offence punishable under this Code and under common law as preserved by this section” which one would have expected to be included. Nor does it include the situation where a person might be punishable under the Code and under customary criminal law; the only protection from double punishment in such a case in the Codes is found in the sections cited at the commencement of this footnote, which were enacted only in 1955 and are still not found in four of the territories where this type of Code applies.

^{page 11 note 8} Sections 20, 17, 20 of the respective Codes already cited.

^{page 12 note 1} Criminal Code, Act 29, s. 8.

^{page 12 note 2} (1954), 5 N.R.L.R. 685.

^{page 12 note 3} By the Imperial Acts Extension Ordinance, cap. 27.

^{page 12 note 4} See Allott, Essays in African Law, pp. 6–10.

^{page 12 note 5} 1961 R. & N. 673.

^{page 13 note 1} The Uganda (Independence) Order in Council, 1962, S.I. 1962 No. 2175, The Schedule, Art. 24 (8); adopted from The Nigeria (Constitution) Order in Council, 1960, S.I. 1960 No. 1652, Second Schedule, Art. 21 (10). In each case there is a saving to permit punishment by a court of record of contempt; and the provision in Uganda will not come into force until 9th October, 1964, to allow time for the reduction of customary criminal law to writing.

^{page 13 note 2} Section 146 of the Penal Decree, cap. 13.

^{page 13 note 3} Penal Code of Northern Nigeria, ss. 387, 388.

^{page 14 note 1} Green v. Fitzgerald 1914 A.D. 88.

^{page 14 note 2} R. v. Nbakwa 1956, 2 S.A. 557.

^{page 14 note 3} Enacted by Ordinance No. 24 of 1886 of the Cape of Good Hope Colony.

^{page 14 note 4} See Hahlo and Kahn, The Union ofSouth Africa, p. 293.

^{page 14 note 5} de Wet and Swanepoel, Strafreg, p. 15. It is fair to add that this is not a commendation in the views of the learned authors to whom “Die Engelse strafreg is, soos bekend, agterlik” (agterlik: “out of date, behind the times”). And see below, p. 15, n. 4.

^{page 14 note 6} Report of the Native Laws and Customs Commission, 1883 (Reference G.4 of 1883), para. 39.

^{page 14 note 7} See, for example, R. v. Koortz 1953 1 S.A. 371.

^{page 14 note 8} [1954] A.C. 235; 1954 H.C.T.L.R. 38; see also R. v. Gani1957 2 S.A. 212.

^{page 15 note 1} That the South African law was as the Privy Council stated it on this point was recorded by Morice in his English and Roman-Dutch Law, 2nd edition, 1905, P-339, quoting van der Linden, Institutes, 2, 1, 8: mere non-prevention may render one an accessory to the commission of a crime.

^{page 15 note 2} Morice, op. cit., also discusses this point and states (p. 339) that in Roman-Dutch law concealment of a crime already committed is not itself criminal unless the welfare and safety of the State depend on discovery, or there is a definite law or official duty requiring it, quoting van der Linden, Instututes, 2, 1, 18.

^{page 15 note 3} Lansdown, Outlines of South African Criminal Law and Procedure, 2nd edition, 1960, p. 6.

^{page 15 note 4} See, for example, de Wet and Swanepoel, Strafreg, 1949, pp. 14–16, esp. at p. 16: “Suid-Afrika behoort nog, wat sy reg betref, tot die vastelandse kultuur-groep.”

^{page 16 note 1} Hone, H. R., “The Native of Uganda and the criminal law”, Uganda Journal, vol. VI, p. 1.Google Scholar

^{page 16 note 2} For some aspects of which, in recent cases, see post, pp. 57–59.

^{page 16 note 3} In Nyasaland, the newly established Local Courts may not impose a criminal penalty “otherwise than in respect of an offence constituted under an Ordinance of the Protectorate or under any rule, regulation, order or by-law made thereunder”: Local Courts Ordinance, No. 8 of 1962, s. 12 (proviso).

^{page 17 note 1} Eugene Cotran, Report on Customary Criminal Offences in Kenya, 1962: see above PP. 1–3

^{page 17 note 2} The Future of Law in Africa, Record of Proceedings of the London Conference, edited by A. N. Allott, 1960, pp. 36–7.

Article contents

Criminal Law in the Africa of Today and Tomorrow

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests